Skip to main content

Table 1 Scenarios simulated using the Jurisdictional-Model

From: Evaluating the sensitivity of jurisdictional heterogeneity and jurisdictional mixing in national level HIV prevention analyses: context of the U.S. ending the HIV epidemic plan

Scenario no.

Mixing assumption

Care Intervention

(HIV-diagnosis rate, care-drop-out rate, and PrEP coverage)

Jurisdictional heterogeneity assumption

EHE jurisdictions

non-EHE jurisdictions

[S1]

No-mixing

Baseline (2018): Values kept constant at 2018 national estimates for all years

Baseline (2018): Values kept constant at 2018 national estimates for all years

Homogeneous care and risk group distribution: national estimates used for all jurisdictions

[S2]

Level 1-mixing

[S3]

Level-2 mixing

[S4]

Level-3 mixing

[S5]

No-mixing

EHE plan: Values calibrated to nationally achieve EHE targets (95–95-95) by 2025, and kept constant at 2025 value thereafter

EHE plan: Values kept constant at 2018 national estimates until 2025, and thereafter, calibrated to nationally achieve EHE targets (95–95-95) by 2030

[S6]

Level 1-mixing

[S7]

Level-2 mixing

[S8]

Level-3 mixing

[S9]

No-mixing

Baseline (2018): Values kept constant at 2018 jurisdiction-specific for all years

Baseline (2018): Values kept constant at 2018 jurisdiction-specific for all years

Heterogeneous care and risk group distribution: jurisdiction-specific estimates

[S10]

Level 1-mixing

[S11]

Level-2 mixing

[S12]

Level-3 mixing

[S13]

No-mixing

EHE plan: Jurisdiction-specific estimates calibrated to achieve EHE targets (95–95-95) within each jurisdiction by 2025, and kept constant at 2025 value thereafter

EHE plan: Jurisdiction-specific estimates kept constant at 2018 values until 2025, and thereafter, calibrated to achieve EHE targets (95–95-95) by 2030 within each jurisdiction

[S14]

Level 1-mixing

[S15]

Level-2 mixing

[S16]

Level-3 mixing

  1. See Table 2 for data assumptions in each mixing category